IRB approve new scrum trial, “crouch, bind, set"

Ruck Inspector

The International Rugby Board Council has announced the implementation of a global trial of the “crouch, bind, set” scrum engagement sequence, which is aimed at enhancing player welfare by reducing impact on engagement by up to 25 per cent in elite competition.

Approval of the sequence on player welfare grounds, is coupled with a call for Game-wide commitment from law-makers, match officials, coaches and players to ensure a fair and positive attitude is applied to deal with scrum issues facing the elite level of the Game.

Implementation will begin at the start of the next season in both hemispheres and follows extensive evaluation of the sequence during the recent IRB Pacific Rugby Cup, which indicated the possible delivery of a more stable platform leading to fewer resets and more successful scrums.

In a revision of the 'crouch, touch, set' engagement sequence currently being trialled, props will be expected to bind using their outside arm after the referee has called "bind" in the sequence.

The front rows will maintain the bind until the referee calls “set”. At that point, the two packs will engage.

a certain Irish prop isn't a fan:

Cian Healy ‏@ProperChurch 17m
goodbye props, hello 2 new flankers....

irishbucsfan

Doesn't seem terrible.

Wasn't there some poster on here a while ago claiming this was physically impossible?

CIARAN_BOYLE

scary the level of change going on in the scrum, crouch touch pause engage crouch touch set and now crouch bind set.

Has to confuse the poor props.

awec

While the impact in the scrum is fun to watch, it gets pretty boring after the 3rd or 4th reset. Something needs to change.

Chucky the tree

It'll be like Rugby league. Also having two-three more mobile players on the pitch will make it harder for attacking teams which won't be good from an entertainment perspective.

Ruck Inspector

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It'll be like Rugby league. Also having two-three more mobile players on the pitch will make it harder for attacking teams which won't be good from an entertainment perspective.

I've seen this type of talk on twitter, I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Swiwi

I'm happy with the idea. I'd like to see more of the props having to demonstrate technical prowess, and less of unstable scrum platform partly due to the power of the hit (ie more of a "wrestling match", and less of just raw engagement power). If the scrum stays up more, then better props should have a chance to shine. At the moment, a strong scrum often results in seeing no scrums at all, and just a series of penalty kicks and freekicks. The scrum is supposed to be a form of restart, not a constant source of penalties. No teams try and force penalties at lineouts, but scrums are constantly seen as an easy way to get 3 points. I'm happy to see the focus back on it being a form of restarting play.

Podge_irl

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Also having two-three more mobile players on the pitch will make it harder for attacking teams which won't be good from an entertainment perspective.

Sure it'll be grand, we'll just remove two players to give more room

Podge_irl

I'm generally in favour of this move, though would like to see it in practice before making my mind up. There are a lot of people who know a lot more than me about scrums claiming that the "hit" is the biggest problem and also a comparatively recent phenomenon. I actually wouldn't like to see the scrum simply become a means to restart play, as I actually quite enjoy watching a dominant scrum and it has big psychological advantages. While you don't gain penalties from lineouts for being on top, its a pretty serious advantage in a game.

Teferi

I think I will wait and see how it works out before judging it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIo02kiAUfg

No collapsed scrums back then. Pretty much going back to the old ways in the scrum.

Glad they allowed lifting in the Lineouts though!

toomevara

Podge_irl wrote: »

Sure it'll be grand, we'll just remove two players to give more room

Now you're talkin'....:D

Ruck Inspector

examples:

TheGoldenAges

It'll be a sad day when this is introduced

toomevara

I'll reserve judgement, but this seems yet another case of re-arranging deckchairs while the luxury liner continues to sink. Until the 'hit' is removed the scrum will continue to be a disaster...

Buer

It won't mean the end of the scrum as a contest. There will still be an engage and a battle. There just won't be a complete unstable hit to begin the sequence. It's not going back to the manner it was years ago where there was a big lean in and then a complete mess of a wheeling, dipping, spinning shoving match which, for me, was equally lacking as a contest.

This should, if anything, stop technically poor props from being able to chance it and drop the scrum on the hit in the (pretty likely) chance that the referee won't know who did what and order the reset.

Podge_irl

toomevara wrote: »

I'll reserve judgement, but this seems yet another case of re-arranging deckchairs while the luxury liner continues to sink. Until the 'hit' is removed the scrum will continue to be a disaster...

The goal here seems to be simply to reduce the hit. I've noticed a number of props who don't even bother with the "touch" phase of the current engagement and even when they do they are just grazing with their fingertips. This will force the front rows closer and I imagine if it doesn't work they'll go to the next step and eliminate the hit altogether.

I'm not overly perturbed about the possible elimination of the hit, but I very much don't want to see scrums end as a contest.

Ruck Inspector

Twitter Interactions about this.

Are you in favour of the hit being reduced? What's the feeling amongst props at your level, is it a good thing?

Mike Ross: hard to tell. Probably better in the long term injury wise as reduced impact, but will make reaction speed more important

What's your take on the latest changes to the scrum by the IRB? Will it reduce amount of collapsed scrums?

Mike Ross: apparently it reduces collapses by 20%. Tried it in training last week, lowers the hit massively.

Swiwi

Ruck Inspector wrote: »

Twitter Interactions about this.

Are you in favour of the hit being reduced? What's the feeling amongst props at your level, is it a good thing?

Mike Ross: hard to tell. Probably better in the long term injury wise as reduced impact, but will make reaction speed more important

What's your take on the latest changes to the scrum by the IRB? Will it reduce amount of collapsed scrums?

Mike Ross: apparently it reduces collapses by 20%. Tried it in training last week, lowers the hit massively.

If it's good enough for Mike Ross, it's good enough for me. It's not designed to end the scrum as a contest, in fact it probably enhances it, as there are fewer collapses.

Besides, England will need to find new tactics to score points, so that's got to be a good thing :pac: Mind you, fairly dodgy reffing from Andre Watson just about cost Eng RWC 2003, so then again they might be happy with the changes.

Ruck Inspector

Reaction speed in terms of responding to the 'set' call or to what the other front row is trying to do?

Mike Ross: set call. Although because the hit is reduced, it won't be as difficult to recover from being late as it is now

dtpc191991

Ruck Inspector wrote: »

a certain Irish prop isn't a fan:

Cian Healy ‏@ProperChurch 17m
goodbye props, hello 2 new flankers....

Healy will be alright hes fast enough in the loose. Does this mean we can move SOB to 3 and put a genuine openside at 7. XD

Tim Robbins

Do people think the number of reset scrums is higher the higher level of rugby?
Sometimes watching professional rugby I can't believe the number of reset scrums. Whereas they rarely happen at U14.

What about J1, J2, J3 etc?

In my experience the higher the level the more resets.

In my subjective experience scrums are not reffed consistently or very well at higher levels.

Opinions?

Tim Robbins

Podge_irl wrote: »

The goal here seems to be simply to reduce the hit. I've noticed a number of props who don't even bother with the "touch" phase of the current engagement and even when they do they are just grazing with their fingertips. This will force the front rows closer and I imagine if it doesn't work they'll go to the next step and eliminate the hit altogether.

I'm not overly perturbed about the possible elimination of the hit, but I very much don't want to see scrums end as a contest.

It should also cut down on the really annoying FKs for early hits.

Swiwi

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Do people think the number of reset scrums is higher the higher level of rugby?
Sometimes watching professional rugby I can't believe the number of reset scrums. Whereas they rarely happen at U14.

What about J1, J2, J3 etc?

In my experience the higher the level the more resets.

In my subjective experience scrums are not reffed consistently or very well at higher levels.

Opinions?

It's just simple physics I would have thought. Young kids hardly have the weight and power to cause scrum collapses, whereas the bigs boys do.

There's a lot of knowledgeable rugby & university people behind the changes I think it'll work. I reckon some of the other trial laws, like 5-second rule for the ruck will go permanent as well.

Stev_o

****ing about time. The whole "touch" command is stupid from every perspective and it's barely done by props. Hopefully this means that refs will actually be able to enforce proper binding compared to whats going on at the moment.

Steve Perchance

Think this is a good step. The reduced hit improves safety, the props are made bind properly from the start, meaning proper legal technique will be rewarded, and the cost benefit of going early is changed - before you'd risk a fk if a penalty could come of it. Now you probably wont get a pen so will wait for the call.

Now we just need straight feeds and hookers being judged on their ability to hook the ball rather than just their throwing. I think a big factor for the scrums not collapsing at junior level is the enforcement of the scrum feed. Even at J4 you'd be pinged for throwing it in the second row more than not

Edit: Spoke too soon - further down the release is this gem:

"Coupled with the process, the IRB will instruct referees to ensure that the ball does not enter the tunnel unless the scrum is square and stationary and that a straight throw-in is strictly policed."

If this is done, the days of endless resets, FKs and penalties may be over.

Eoin

I think it sounds like a good idea; look forward to seeing how it works in practice. I also think it's great that the IRB are willing to try out new laws/variations and ditch the ones that don't work out after the trial.

sydthebeat

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Doesn't seem terrible.

Wasn't there some poster on here a while ago claiming this was physically impossible?

that would have been me

i was commenting on the shorter bind, but in the video they manage to get a bind under the arm pit... so im corrected.

although i do think that it offers a loose head a get out clause of 'pulling down' because a long bind is now impossible. This makes it harder for the ref to determine downward pressure. The natural movement for the TH to make is to turn the LHs shoulder in.

all in all its step toward reducing the hit, but lets see how its reffed.

Taco Corp

I'm all for improving the scrum and player safety, but I can't help but wonder what actually refing the game in accordance with the current laws would have achieved.

the fact that scrum halfs do not throw the ball in straight and both packs push before the ball has been thrown in should have been addressed first before moving onto new scrum engagements sequences. Brian Moore has written about this a few times I believe.

Macy0161

The hit only really started developing in the 90's. Making it about scrumaging rather than the hit will actually ensure there's a place for the traditional prop, rather than that Healy tweet in the op.

Has to be accompanied by sticking to the rules of straight put in and no pushing before the ball is in. Make hookers actually hook! That's where I am really reserving judgement, tbh.

ormond lad

Think its an ok idea. Ive reffed(u13/14 level only) and played under touch set laws and thinking about bind set I would have to play/ref a game under the laws to see what its really like.
Going on what bind set sounds like in my head I would prefer touch set but would like to see a game or two under the new sequence before making up my mind